Supreme Court Tells Courts to Revisit Transgender Rulings
The ruling in Tennessee’s gender-affirming care case could unravel key legal wins for transgender Americans as lower courts are told to take another look.
The U.S. Supreme Court has ordered lower federal courts to revisit pro-transgender rulings after siding with Tennessee in a 6-3 decision upholding the state’s ban on gender-affirming care for minors.
In its June 30 ruling, the Court found the law did not discriminate based on sex or transgender status — and while it did not address other laws affecting transgender Americans, it opened the door for states to impose even broader restrictions on transgender rights and legal protections.
As reported by CNN, Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Amy Coney Barrett wrote in concurring opinions that courts should not be required to closely scrutinize laws alleged to discriminate against transgender people.
While the majority of the court did not embrace the view, if those three can convince two of their colleagues that laws restricting transgender rights are not discriminatory in a future case, conservative states could be free to pass whatever anti-transgender laws they wish.
As a result of the Supreme Court’s ruling, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals must now review a decision involving insurance exclusions in West Virginia and North Carolina, according to the Associated Press.
The appeals court had previously ruled that West Virginia’s ban on Medicaid coverage for gender-affirming surgery, and North Carolina’s exclusion of transition-related care from state employee health plans, were unconstitutional.
The court also held that the exclusions discriminated against transgender individuals based on sex and transgender status, violating both the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
In California, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals must reconsider a case challenging Idaho’s ban on Medicaid coverage for transition-related surgery for adults.
In Colorado, the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals must also revisit a decision that blocked Oklahoma from enforcing a ban on changing gender markers on birth certificates.
In a separate case, the Court declined to hear an appeal from transgender minors and their families seeking to overturn Kentucky’s ban on gender-affirming care — a law nearly identical to Tennessee’s and challenged on the same legal grounds.
The Supreme Court took no action on appeals court decisions in cases from Arizona, Idaho, and West Virginia involving bans on transgender students participating on female-designated sports teams. In all three, the 4th and 9th Circuits found the laws likely discriminatory and unconstitutional. However, the high court could choose to hear one or more of the cases in its next term, which begins in October.
Support Metro Weekly’s Journalism
These are challenging times for news organizations. And yet it’s crucial we stay active and provide vital resources and information to both our local readers and the world. So won’t you please take a moment and consider supporting Metro Weekly with a membership? For as little as $5 a month, you can help ensure Metro Weekly magazine and MetroWeekly.com remain free, viable resources as we provide the best, most diverse, culturally-resonant LGBTQ coverage in both the D.C. region and around the world. Memberships come with exclusive perks and discounts, your own personal digital delivery of each week’s magazine (and an archive), access to our Member's Lounge when it launches this fall, and exclusive members-only items like Metro Weekly Membership Mugs and Tote Bags! Check out all our membership levels here and please join us today!
You must be logged in to post a comment.